Limited Nuclear War

It might not be deterred by the US nuclear retaliatory capability

It is a catastrophe with no predictable limits

Because it is strait-jacketed by fear of the very power we hold

To avoid unlimited disaster

It would be deterred by the Soviet ability to carry out a nuclear strike

Mutually assured destruction

Not requiring utmost military effort

Through diplomatic communication

Communicating clear policies

The American ship in the port of Bari, Italy in 1943

To avoid crossing them inadvertently or accidentally

To prevent escalation and avoid accidents

The secret keeping of the presence of mustard to protect civilians and military personnel

To deter the use of nuclear weapons against vital interests

Manipulation of risk and development of specific forces structures

Emphasis on nuclear danger and crisis stability

Deterrence through the threat of devastating retaliation

The concern is that it may lead to a nuclear exchange, even if limited, and that it is uncertain whether everyone would come to their senses in the heat of such an exchange.

It helps to understand the development of nuclear strategies and their impact on national security and international relations.

The concept of 'mutually assured destruction' is based on the idea that both parties in a conflict will be destroyed if they engage in nuclear warfare.

Existential deterrence focuses on the mere existence of nuclear weapons as a deterrent, rather than their actual use or threatened use.

The primary goal of arms control agreements is to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons and reduce the risk of nuclear conflict.

The concept of 'limited war' refers to the idea of fighting wars with limited objectives and avoiding all-out nuclear conflict.

Understanding limited war is crucial in nuclear strategy as it enables the avoidance of accidental escalation by limiting objectives and avoiding unrestricted general war. This concept is essential in preventing the escalation of conflicts into full-scale nuclear war.

The core idea behind existential deterrence is that the threat of nuclear war is sufficient to deter an adversary, regardless of the specific circumstances or intentions. This concept differs from other nuclear deterrence strategies, such as mutually assured destruction, which relies on the threat of retaliation.

The primary goal of arms control agreements is to reduce the risk of nuclear war by limiting the number of nuclear weapons and preventing the proliferation of nuclear technology. These agreements contribute to international security by reducing the likelihood of nuclear conflict and promoting disarmament.

Understanding the evolution of strategic nuclear doctrine is crucial in understanding the development of deterrence strategies and the impact of nuclear weapons on international security. This knowledge helps to appreciate the complexities and challenges of nuclear policymaking and the importance of reducing the risk of nuclear war.

The purpose of being ready to fight limited wars with limited objectives is to prevent the escalation of conflicts into full-scale nuclear war. This concept is central to the theory of nuclear war, as it recognizes the devastating consequences of nuclear war and seeks to find ways to limit the objectives of conflicts and avoid escalation.

The concern about the US being deterred from initiating nuclear use is that it could lead to a loss of credibility and deterrence, as an adversary may not believe that the US would actually use nuclear weapons. This concern is related to the concept of mutually assured destruction, which relies on the threat of retaliation to deter an adversary.

That limited war cannot be a means of bringing about a radical alteration in the distribution of power.

Geographical scope, weapons, and targets.

Flexible and discriminating systems, strategies, and tactics capable of supporting limited objectives under a wide variety of conditions.

Adapting nuclear weapons to limited war requirements.

It allows for a clear distinction between these means and targets, enabling a more controlled and limited response.

To respond to aggression locally, facilitating a clear distinction between strategic and tactical means and targets.